Written and published by Fred Patten on the LASFS Rex Rotary, December 16, 1964. Intended for Apa L, Ninth Distribution, LASFS Meeting #1427, December 17, 1964. Address: 1825 Greenfield Ave., Los Angeles, Calif., 90025. Phone: GRanite 3-6321.

***************************************************************************

As the last two Thursdays in this month fell on holidays, as per LASFS tradition, our elections of the Executive Committee for the next six months falls tonight. By & large, it seems a pretty open race, too. Dave Hulan looks like a shoo-in for Director, which is all to the good as far as I'm concerned. Al Lewis says he's coming to the meeting tonight to decline the nomination he got last week, which settles it in my mind; Al being the only person I can think of offhand who might win my vote away from Dave. Paul Turner is a good man, but he's had the Directorate twice running just recently; I'd rather see him as Treasurer this time around. There's always a chance someone else will be nominated tonight, of course, but I don't expect that Dave will be faced with any real competition. For Secretary, we've already got Jack Harness and Hank Stine actively campaigning. Of the two, I think I'd prefer Harness. Jack's minutes are witty and he delivers them well; t heir main fault is inaccuracy. If Jack will just start taking notes during a meeting instead of relying on his 103% accurate memory several days later when he gets around to writing the minutes up, they'd be a lot better. Of course, none of us are familiar with Hank's minutes at all, since he hasn't taken any yet, and it may be he'd prove a better Secretary than Jack. However, assuming they'd prove to be as weird and uncool as Hank strives to be himself, I'd rather not take the gamble. The devil we know, and all that. The other three posts are wide open, as far as I know. The Treasurer is our most-worked officer, since he has to collect dews and keep written records of them. As I said, I think Paul would be a good man for the post, assuming he'd accept the nomination. Who else do we have that's an accurate and conscientious record-keeper? For Senior Committeeman, I know Bruce Pelz intends running for the post, and I'll back him. I don't know of anybody who's running for Junior Committeeman; considering how Tom Gilbert was complaining about the incumbents lately not doing their jobs, I'm in favor of giving him the job, but he's already said he'll decline the nomination if tendered. Who else have we got? It should be somebody who shows up regularly and who likes to greet people. Well, we'll see who turns up as we open the nominations tonight.

As election night always draws one of our biggest turnouts of the year, we'll get a chance to see how close our 35 copies come to providing enough Distributions for all those who want copies. I'm looking forward with interest to seeing what sort of contributorial response we get; as far as I know, all the localites except the Pelzes have expressed willingness to up their run to 35 or 40 copies. Last week, we had 31 complete copies of the Distribution and 6 incomplete ones, and they all disappeared fast enough. I think this should definitely prove that at least 35 copies are highly desirable, whether you feel they're absolutely necessary or not.

-- BEING COMMENTS ON THE EIGHTH DISTRIBUTION

.............................................................................................................................................

Tom Gilbert - Well, several of your measures are already in force now, and I'd prefer holding off on making any more official until we see how things are working out. (1) I've already asked for 35 copies. (2) The Pelzes are the only major exception to the joint membership concept, and Dian has now dropped out. The Trimbles take only one, and Katya hasn't been claiming a copy for herself unless there are some actually left over (and last week's partial copy was the first, I think). (3) I don't like the sound of this; if we refused copies to all non-contributors who had access to someone else's copy, we could just produce one copy for the whole lot of non-contributors at LASFS and mark it "Read and Pass On". If we can persuade a non-contrib not to take a copy, that's fine, but I wouldn't want to turn anybody away on the sole excuse that he can read so-and-so's copy so he doesn't get one himself. (4) I am seriously considering a "no prior distribution" rule; the main objection is that the only person this would be sure to affect is Dick Lupoff, and I'd rather read Lupoff's overruns from Apa F than a lot of other contributors' original material. Instead, I will pass a legibility requirement; if anyone's Apa L zine is illegible due to smearage, faintness, or any other reason, he will not get a copy of that week's Distribution, unless he otherwise qualifies for one (i.e., is present at the meeting to claim one). (5) This has already been decreed. I might allow an occasional appearance by a new out-of-towner, especially if some of our current ones drop out, but this isn't anything I can state a fixed rule on at this date. Needless to say, this rule goes only as far as new out-of-towners claiming copies of the Distribution; if anyone is willing to contribute regularly to Apa L without claiming a copy of the Distribution, he'll be welcome wherever he is. (Though I certainly don't expect anybody to be that altruistic.) (6) Unfortunate, but this is an obvious rule. Outsiders missing a Distribution will not get a copy if we can't spare them, and it's highly unlikely we'll ever have any extras. The same goes for (7) An Eller who's not present at the meeting and doesn't have anything in the Distribution will not be able to have a copy set aside for him. ## I know "How to Make a Man" was a flop; that's one of the reasons I said "The World of Ray Bradbury" may be one of the first stage sf productions to win critical acclaim. Almost everything that went before was either bad sf or actually a so-called sophisticated fantasy in disguise. "RUR" is the only other serious sf stage production I can think of offhand that got good reviews before "Bradbury". ## Why do you refuse to learn how to run a mimeograph yourself? With Boggs', Hannifen's, Fitch's, and the LASFS Rex handy, learning how to operate them would just about mean you could run off anything you wanted to. You can't always count on catching someone with spare time to do your zine for you just when you need it. If you can get someone to do the job for you, fine; but I should think you'd be able to see the advantage to knowing how to run the machine yourself in case of an emergency when you have a deadline and absolutely nobody is around to help.

Jack Harness -- But Verne and Wells were just about contemporaries. Virtually all of Wells' best-known sf novels were written during Verne's lifetime, and Verne read at least The First Men in the Moon (his challenge to Wells to "show me this Cavourite".) I see your point about it being possible to do contemporary versions of Wells' stories while it would be much more difficult to do the same with Verne's, but it's not at all impossible. "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea" is almost a contemporary 20,000 Leagues as it is; how much difference was there between the plots of From the Earth to the Moon and Heinlein's "Destination: Moon"? And Wells' The Time Machine was left as a period piece, and was quite successful in those scenes because of it.

Caltech CATS -- Thanks for the Chem. Student's 23 Psalm. ## The Discon was the World Convention in Washington, D. C. in 1963. As to the "Hugo" categories, I have no objection to leaving an option for a couple of new ones each year, but I think the basic categories of Best Novel, Short Fiction, Prozine, Fanzine, Artist, and Dramatic Award should be fixed as there's invariably something to qualify in each every ear, and they well cover the basic divisions in the entire field.